31 ms·

Amazon Sends ‘Vote No’ Instructions to Unionizing Employees

640 points by fireball_blaze 6y ago

sodality2 6y ago
Detailed, 6 step instructions on how to open a ballot and mark no? Thanks, amazon. This is almost as scummy as asking the city to change traffic lights so union organizers have a harder time talking to workers in between shifts. https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-says-traffic-lights-were-changed-near-amazon.html https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-say...
- deelowe 6y ago
  I think an important detail that's needed here is how long the traffic back up issue has been a problem and when amazon requested it be change. If this has been an issue for years and amazon only recently requested the change, that's pretty scummy.
  - sodality2 6y ago
    “This action was taken on Dec. 15, 2020 after being notified by Amazon of traffic delays. The action taken is routine for traffic signal operations, in that signal timing plans are adjusted to be as efficient as possible.” Doesn't say how long it was a problem though.
- duxup 6y ago
  I got instructions from more than one party this past fall on how to fill out a ballot and mail it early and etc.
  - sodality2 6y ago
    Did they tell you which way to vote, though? And giving reasoning for why (this actually wouldn't surprise me)?
    - duxup 6y ago
      Yes they told me exactly who I should vote for and why.
      - sodality2 6y ago
        Hm. In my opinion that isn't as bad, but I can't put my finger on why. This is one reason: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866
        duxup 6y ago
        I thought it was weird, but I can't imagine a basis for not allowing that. Even if it was someone's boss... they too get to talk / have an opinion... even if I think it is wrong. I've certainly worked for employers who I thought had some very wrong ideas, I still did my own thing voting wise.
      - kedean 6y ago
        IMO the key difference is that you were getting mail from political parties. I think the correct comparison would be if the US government were sending you mail instructing you on how to vote for the party already in power. There's a big difference between the party pleading its case to you and the government itself endorsing that party. I think Amazon's power over employees makes it more like the latter, although neither is a perfect analogy. If I had gotten mailers last year directly from the United States government instructing me "how to re-elect Donald J. Trump", I would have been livid. Individual within the company should be able to make their case for why they think unionization is bad, but I don't think the company itself gets a say in this.
  - rtpg 6y ago
    It wasn't your boss telling you how to do that though. The direct power imbalance is pretty different, I think.
    - SilasX 6y ago
      Then I don’t understand the outrage. What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? The GGP seemed to think that there was something particularly bad about the detailed six page instructions. But the GP correctly pointed out they do the same thing in regular government elections (to milk as many voters as they can).
      - jakelazaroff 6y ago
        > What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? Nothing. The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. If they were trying to help you fill out your ballot in good faith, there wouldn't be a problem.
        SilasX 6y ago
        No. The OP was complaining about something already assuming they're telling you to vote no, meaning the OP was adding something on top of that. I was asking what that thing-on-top is. So it has to be something more than: >The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. Which, indeed, you correct yourself on in the next sentence, to say that the issue is that it pretends to be neutral ballot instructions, but, if followed, end in you voting no, and are thus misleading (just guessing -- again, no one here seems to be making it easy to understand what they're objecting to). If so, it would have been helpful for the OP to communicate that the first time around. Remember rtpg joined in to clarify, but actually objected to something else, the power imbalance -- and yet s/he seemed to believe s/he was agreeing with the initial comment! Not everyone can read minds about what a speaker thinks is the most salient part, and we don't deserve to be ridiculed for asking. If you want others to be outraged, it helps to clearly communicate what they're supposed to be outraged about -- starting form a clear model.
- Dirlewanger 6y ago
  Unbelievable. This is petty shit you'd expect from 100+ years ago when companies were breaking strikes by killing people. Might as well rename this country to the Corporate States of America. No level of government has any backbone against the private sector.
  - marcinzm 6y ago
    Yes changing the timing of some traffic lights is exactly the same as killing people.
    - damnyou 6y ago
      Well, for its union busting efforts Amazon has been using spies from the literal, actual Pinkerton: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-pinkerton-spies-worker-labor-unions-2020-11%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-... Yes, it's the same Pinkerton that did this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike edit: Ah, I've been shadow banned. I probably offended the mods when I pointed out how much of a racist Scott Siskind was. Hey dang, you, by virtue of wanting to keep the community on this site over eradicating white supremacism from here — you are a white supremacist.
  - w0m 6y ago
    That's a bit too far. Ignore unions; and amazon fixed traffic congestion leaving their complex. If a unionization effort is reliant on an unnecessary traffic jam to form - it's destined to fail.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Why is one group (union activists) allowed to take such action but the other group isn't? I am not sure I see anything "scummy" in this.
  - sodality2 6y ago
    They are allowed to. That is why they did. Just as I am allowed to call them scummy for it
    - fastball 6y ago
      You know what they meant. Why is one scummy and the other not?
      - sodality2 6y ago
        Amazon is strong-arming workers into voting no with propaganda posters, unions typically hurt amazon (else why would they fight so hard against it), and typically help the workers. Do you not see the problem here? I don't mean to say unions are always right. I see anti-union sentiment from the very company that would be hurt by it to be very much allowed. But since I believe in worker's rights and can see firsthand how poorly they are treated, I see it as scummy.
        s1artibartfast 6y ago
        Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart.
        sodality2 6y ago
        >Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. >Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. >Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. Double standard? Not really. Definitely not the peak of critical reasoning, though. But I'm not judging anti-union vs pro-union propaganda by anything but their motives. >If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart. Ah, but I do. Not inherently, and not always. But net positive in my opinion. Sure, if I change my beliefs to contradict, it will not make sense. Just as if I believed unions were bad and net negative, union propaganda would be considered scummy but amazon propaganda wouldn't. I always try to judge critically, and in my personal opinion, pro vs anti has a clear benefit for the worker on one side. This doesn't mean I think the other shouldn't exist. I don't think that means a double standard, since in my eyes they aren't the same. If they were literally the same, say Amazon wanted the Yankees to win and the workers wanted the Red Sox to win, and I insisted on one side over the other, then it would be a double standard (like 1984, they do it = bad, we do the same thing = good).
- fireball_blaze 6y ago
  Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/ https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/
  - fxtentacle 6y ago
    Wow, just wow. "Don’t buy that dinner, don’t buy those school supplies, don’t buy those gifts because you won’t have that almost $500 you paid in dues." It seems Amazon's main argument for why people shouldn't join a union is that Amazon's wages are so low that they cannot financially afford to. That's almost like saying "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place."
    - _jal 6y ago
      > "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place." Well, yes. The goal of an antiunion campaign is the demoralization/ disempowerment of the workforce. Notice also the recent push for "experimental polities", AKA company towns.
      - CodeMage 6y ago
        St. Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go, I owe my soul to the company store.
      - nexthash 6y ago
        For context about "experimental polities" like the failed Toronto SideWalk labs [1], I've linked an article below [2]. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-toronto-project/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-t... [2] https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company-towns-end-up-as-failed-utopias-94270 https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company...
    - andrepd 6y ago
      "But higher wages can buy many dinners." "Explain how!" "Money can be exchanged for goods and services"
- thiagocsf 6y ago
  This site has an anti ad-block pop up that stops you from closing the browser window in iOS. Had to close the whole HN app to leave the in-app browser.
maxehmookau 6y ago
Ugh, this is disgusting and so patronising. Edit: Also, why are "union avoidance consultants" a thing? The US needs to fix its culture around unions. That's absolutely wild.
- TheCraiggers 6y ago
  I don't think that's caused from the culture around unions so much as it's caused by the culture around capitalism. There are plenty of scummy niches that people have found ways of getting paid for. Everything from consultants to show your company how to layoff people to religious leaders and snake oil salesmen and conmen. It's a big spectrum.
- falcolas 6y ago
  Why pay your employees when you can pay a consultant to show how to keep your employee costs low? /s
  - phone8675309 6y ago
    IF your company thinks spending $X on keeping you from unionizing is worth it then the benefit to you is at least ($X+1)/$num_workers to unionize.
    - chasd00 6y ago
      do you have any idea how big the num_workers number is? I'd wager for the average employee the benefit will be neagative, as in paycheck - union dues. The real benefit goes to the union bosses as num_workers * union_dues.
      - bjoli 6y ago
        Now, I am not very up to date on statistics, but unionised workers have traditionally earned about 10% more than non-uniomized ones in the US since at least the 80s. The article mentions 11%, which seems in line with what I know since before. I doubt any union would charge anywhere near that much.
AlexandrB 6y ago
Amazon's tactics in response to unionizing efforts been extremely revealing. Even if unionizing fails, I'm happy that it forced Amazon to show us all the level of contempt they have for their workforce.
- minikites 6y ago
  Every corporation has contempt for its workforce, it's why labor unions are so necessary.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    Nearly every corporation has naked contempt for its “human resources”, that's why it calls them, and the department responsible for minimizing the cost of exploiting them, “human resources”.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      Indeed. It's a bit sad how us human resources often balk at accepting this fact.
  - Someone1234 6y ago
    It varies. Not because some corporations are moral, but because happy workers are a good long-term strategy and many corporations are stuck with rolling short-term-ism. They reward the top tier on a three-ish year cycle, so executives only need to make the numbers go up for three years before exiting with a higher paying job and compensation via stock sales. The US has a massive issue in general with rolling corporate pump & dump. The whole stock market basically encourages it. That's why we see things like customer retention strategies that actually reduce re-subscriptions and hurt the long term reputations remaining popular (because the short term matters more to executives than the long term, even if the company burns down after they leave).
    - willcipriano 6y ago
      "I'll be gone, you'll be gone"[0] [0]https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/IBGYBG https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/IBGYBG
ahelwer 6y ago
This Amazon union vote is one of the few things I see around me in the world where things have a chance of heading in the right direction. Truly hoping it succeeds and creates a nucleation event to stop our march into ever-more-innovative methods of worker exploitation.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  I felt this was about Uber being told they had to treat drivers like employees in California too, and look how that turned out: A dystopian rule that lawmakers can't overturn to enable worker exploitation.
  - ahelwer 6y ago
    Well, that's electoral politics for ya. Without organized labor power to stand up to capital, things are close to a one-way ratchet.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    These kinds of takes are always weird to me. Shouldn't it matter, at least a little, that the rule was what a 17-point majority of voters wanted? You don't have to personally agree with every democratic outcome, but it almost sounds like you're saying the results of a vote aren't legitimate if they go the wrong way.
    - aidenn0 6y ago
      This is just an anecdote, but perhaps other people can comment, since the plural of anecdote is data... I personally know several people who voted for the proposition under the impression that it was a pro-worker proposition that would guarantee benefits for drivers. There were 3 other people for whom I explained the context around it (including the fact that it was preempting a flawed bill from the legislature) before they mailed their ballots in and they changed their vote. I also know several people who think that we should eliminate the rules for treating workers as employees in general, and they voted for the bill as well, so there's definitely some support. Its definitely clear from my point of view that a significant fraction of the people who voted for the proposition did so because they misunderstood what they were voting for. OTOH that's probably true about all ballot measures ever, and probably most legislation as well.
duxup 6y ago
Call me crazy but I think the employer should get to make their case too.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  "As a trillion dollar company we can't afford better working conditions and pay for you"? The only reason Amazon raised their fulfillment pay was because Bernie Sanders shamed them into it [1]. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+bernie+sanders+pay https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+bernie+sanders+pay
  - duxup 6y ago
    I don't expect people to agree with their case, but they should get to make it.
    - toomuchtodo 6y ago
      By making any case other than robust worker rights and fair compensation, they have demonstrated their culture and priorities as a corporation. But, by all means, I agree that one shouldn't stop their enemy when they're pointing a gun at their feet (edit: to clarify, this implies Amazon is making a strategic failure by fighting unionization efforts, at it reflects poorly on them).
      - duxup 6y ago
        You're hyperbole strikes me as ... kinda out there. Not sure anyone has guns pointed at anyone in this case.
        toomuchtodo 6y ago
        Your comments strike me as unaware or complacent. https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/04/29/Leaving-Amazon https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/04/29/Leaving-A... https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/05/06/Answers https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/05/06/Answers https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/05/amazon-workers-protest-unsafe-grueling-conditions-warehouse https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/05/amazon-wo... https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/youre-just-disposable-new-accounts-from-former-amazon-employees-raise-questions-about-working-conditions/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/youre-just-dispos... https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/11/amazon-warehouse-reports-show-worker-injuries/602530/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/11/amazo... https://nypost.com/2019/07/13/inside-the-hellish-workday-of-an-amazon-warehouse-employee/ https://nypost.com/2019/07/13/inside-the-hellish-workday-of-... https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/16/20696154/amazon-prime-day-2019-strike-warehouse-workers-inhumane-conditions-the-rate-productivity https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/16/20696154/amazon-prime-day...
Zealotux 6y ago
From a non-US point of view, this whole anti-union strategy from Amazon is somehow hilarious to witness on top of being sad. This kind of propaganda feels like its coming from another age, or dimension.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  Right out of the 1900's in fact, gilded age part 2: technologic boogaloo.
  - x2w8TGm8BSTd853 6y ago
    Are the Pinkertons fair game just like they are in Red Dead Redemption 2? Oh, my: but I don’t have a horse. Hope this won’t prevent me from taking part.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Someone1234 6y ago
  The depressing part is that this is actually an improvement over the violence and intimidation tactics of America's past. The US has never been a particularly union supportive country. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_th...
  - pydry 6y ago
    There's still time to return to the good old days when the boss called in a private air force to drop poison gas and bombs on striking workers.
    - ModernMech 6y ago
      Yes, this is a good reminder that the first areal attack on US soil was not Pearl Harbor, but was against striking workers in 1921 at the Battle of Blair Mountain. "By August 29 battle was fully joined. Chafin's men, though outnumbered, had the advantage of higher positions and better weaponry. Private planes were hired to drop homemade bombs on the miners. A combination of poison gas and explosive bombs left over from World War I were dropped in several locations near the towns of Jeffery, Sharples and Blair." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain Someone else in the thread mentioned a revived push for "company towns", which is exactly what these workers were fighting against. Being fired from their company meant losing their job and their house, since it was owned by the company. Honestly, it's not much different from being fired in 2021 and losing your job and your health insurance.
dfxm12 6y ago
I can't believe some of these actions being taken by Amazon don't violate the NLRA. Maybe they've done the math and have concluded that any protentional penalties will cost less than allowing a fair shake at a union or maybe they think the recently packed courts will tend to favor corporate interests over workers' rights.
lucasmullens 6y ago
How does this not backfire? At Google I'm just sitting on the sidelines with the whole union thing, but if they sent me something like this I'd join and support the union immediately.
- ahelwer 6y ago
  This is a pretty interesting question, and I think prods at other questions about the actual form that tech worker unions will take - especially in big companies like Google. Will they be actual organized units capable of orchestrating coordinated action to withhold labor for improvement of material conditions? Or will they just be a sort of caucus that issue statements about political issues at work and occasionally organize an afternoon walkout? If the latter, this isn't the sort of thing that will bother management very much. Certainly not at the existential level of "some of the stock dividend/buyback money will have to be redirected from shareholders to workers, my GOD"
  - whimsicalism 6y ago
    I think employee walkouts will bother management quite a bit. And compensation/benefit issues are political ones.
  - grumple 6y ago
    We might not notice the tech workers walking out at google. It's not like they provide support. At AWS - we'd definitely notice, because their support is really good. > Will they be actual organized units capable of orchestrating coordinated action to withhold labor for improvement of material conditions? Developers have the money to withstand very long strikes if needed. I think there's a lot of power in that.
- skeeter2020 6y ago
  That doesn't make any sense. You're saying you have made some sort of value judgement, presumably based on logic and information, but if someone sends you a piece of propaganda you'd totally change your position? You don' t play poker, do you?
stevespang 6y ago
You can bet there are pinhole cameras installed near that box, Bezos has a feed going straight into his office . . .
RicoElectrico 6y ago
News about Amazon's treatment of workers invariably makes me angry, and I'm not even from USA. Just do something about it. Take the nuclear option.
Grimm1 6y ago
Personally I like the idea of worker representation on the board of directors, with enough representation that they don't just get steamrolled by other board members as a potentially viable solution to worker concerns. I think people should be treated pretty well in a job setting, my thought is that well treated employees while costing more actually wind up producing for the business well in excess of the expense and much more than when treated like parts as well as it imo just being the ethical thing to do. I've only heard negative things from friends who have worked in unions or with unionized employees and I understand things vary greatly union to union so I'm skeptical of how overall beneficial they are to normal workers, high performing workers and the business which ultimately they work for. They largely seem like ways for certain outspoken individuals to consolidate power and become another vehicle for corruption and stagnation, much like already broken corporate structure. All of that said this may be the only avenue possible at the moment as nothing in the US screams major labor reforms to me and no larger business seems willing to try to experiment with other solutions.
- phabora 6y ago
  High-performers (read: well-payed workers) like to complain about the nefarious corrupting influence of unions but seldom consider the case that the high-performers (read: upper-middle class) might have a vested interest in the corrupt status quo where the majority of workers facilitate their high-performing (read: privileged) lifestyles.
  - eeZah7Ux 6y ago
    You are confusing skill with access to capital.
  - Grimm1 6y ago
    I mean all the anecdotes I have come from electricians and county paid groundskeepers and who also happen to be my close friends so I'd have to say your assertion if not false in totality is false in this case for certain. Edit: Oh and a general contractor or two.
    - 6y ago
jonathantf2 6y ago
Interesting that the site they're linking in that booklet is hosted on Squarespace and not AWS.
TheMagicHorsey 6y ago
It's amazing how little HN readers understand about unions. A company is an organization that has some positive and some negative aspects. And believe it or not, a union is also an organization with some negative and positive aspects. The difference is, once you have a union in an organization its very hard to dislodge it no matter how dysfunctional it gets. I would suggest HN readers read about what UAW did in the auto industry, particularly the way the auto union functioned at the Toyota NUMA plant in California. Then they should read about the corruption at the Teamsters (I'm sure you have heard about the collusion between union bosses like Hoffa and the Mafia). The high profile corruption is just the tip of the iceberg. Even your local teachers union has a tremendous amount of nepotism and corruption ... its not at all meritocratic. And the worst part about a union is that it turns the workplace from a zone where we are evaluated based on our output into a zone where politics dominates when it comes time for compensation and promotion discussions. I will never again work in a unionized workplace ... and thanks to getting an education and learning how to program I will thankfully not have to do it ever again.
- rtkwe 6y ago
  If we're going to go back in time to talk about Hoffa era unions why stop there, companies used to prefer gunning down their striking/organizing employees with Pinkerton agents rather than give benefits of any kind. With a union there's some democratic influence. You're only option for changing the company is to leave if you're anywhere below VP level.
- sodality2 6y ago
  >I would suggest HN readers read about what UAW did in the auto industry, particularly the way the auto union functioned at the Toyota NUMA plant in California. Link some, first results I get for UAW + auto industry are propagandized anti-union sites and Toyota's own press release about how they're proud to give more money to the team.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- UncleMeat 6y ago
  > The difference is, once you have a union in an organization its very hard to dislodge it no matter how dysfunctional it gets. In comparison to a business? With a union I have some voting power. With a business I have zero power.
durnygbur 6y ago
Is this for real? They really sent post with instructions on who should one vote for?
- Spivak 6y ago
  Have you never received a voting guide from the local chapter of your political party?
  - durnygbur 6y ago
    no, never
balabaster 6y ago
Full disclosure: I've always been anti-union for my own personal approach to life. I do see the value in unions, I've just always, to this point, been a go-it-alone-and-fight-my-own-battles kind of person. I don't want to be beholden to a union or their rules any more than I want to be beholden to an employer beyond my contractual obligations for which I'm paid. That said, people should take note of what happened when Walmart used these tactics. Employees then went on to suffer such things as zero hour contracts, contracts where time was just shy of the legal requirement to give them benefits, pay was no more than the minimum required in any given state/province and people became slaves to their jobs because they couldn't afford the time off to find other jobs because then they wouldn't be able to make ends meet or there were no other jobs so Walmart had zero incentive to pay any more than absolutely required to by law. etc. etc. etc. because humanity is only afforded if legally required [which I personally find disgusting]. These are tactics to prevent a coalition of employees from having their rights heard and maintained... even with this coalition someone is fighting to maintain and win your rights(!!!!!) There's something very wrong with anyone having to fight for their rights to be given, but that's another discussion. In a commercial environment that allow employers to behave this way, where the only advantage to winning your rights is in a coalition of the workforce holding employers to account, unions absolutely must not only be allowed but must also be protected. Its okay if you're bullheaded enough or within your means enough to walk away if your rights aren't given fair consideration and honoured, but if you're in a position where you're a prisoner to your job, i.e. can't afford to take time off to find another job/other income, or there are no other jobs in your area and you don't have the means to leave etc. you don't have any bargaining chip. No employer should ever have the privilege of keeping you prisoner, nor preventing you from having a means to bargain for your very right to fair treatment. Amazon needs to be severely reprimanded for this and taught a lesson about what it means to honour employees' rights.
- tyingq 6y ago
  You appear to perhaps be from the UK (saw "honour"). Employees in the UK have quite a lot more protection by default than they do in the US. I do respect your go-it-alone-and-fight-my-own-battles position, but consider that you might feel differently if you were in a US "right to work" state.
wooptoo 6y ago
Here we can see the vicious beast hunting its prey. It's getting desperate now.
williesleg 6y ago
Bunch of commies
lorax_108 6y ago
unions FTW!
dominotw 6y ago
wouldnt it be better to fix 'trail period' laws so thats possible
JCM9 6y ago
I have mixed feelings about unions. While there’s no question that unions played an important role in labor rights during the 20th century, in the 21st century unions now seems to be more a part of the problem rather than a part of the solution.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
whoisjuan 6y ago
This looks bad but companies with unions do this a lot. I remember seeing welcome packages for Delta Airlines employees where they tell them to not join the union and explaining why on their perspective is bad to do so. I'm not saying this is correct, but unions are rarely aligned with companies, so there is always going to be a perpetual fight between unions and companies that have them. You can't really expect Amazon to embrace unionization. They are in their right to try to disincentivize unionization if they believe it could be damaging for their business. Again. I'm not saying this is correct, but I guess that's the whole point of unionizing. If it were an easy fight, it wouldn't make sense to unionize. For the sake of transparency, I would disclose that I'm in principle anti-union but I understand why they exist and how can they be helpful, especially to employees who work low wage jobs and who could be vulnerable to abusive employment practices.
- wccrawford 6y ago
  I've yet to work for a big non-union company that didn't have some anti-union literature or speech once in a while. It didn't even matter if unionizing was in the employees best interest or not. The company knew it was not in their best interest, and so they spoke out. I'm not at all surprised that Amazon is doing the same.
- A12-B 6y ago
  They are quite literally not within their right to stop unionisation, as that is illegal. Also it looks bad because it is bad. btw, the line between 'disincentivising' and 'forcing' is decided arbitrarily by you. If they send text messages, block traffic lights, and screw with people's mailboxes, i think amazon crosses the line.
  - whoisjuan 6y ago
    Definitely not illegal. You think Amazon, one of the largest companies in the world, will engage in any anti-union campaign without consulting their lawyers on what's right and what's not? It's ok if this is doesn't sit well on you. As I said in the parent comment, if unions were easy they wouldn't make sense. Things companies that have unions or are dealing with unionization efforts can do [1]: - Describe the good features of working for your company, such as existing benefits, job security and steady work. - Remind them that signing union authorization cards doesn’t mean they must vote for the union. - Inform them of the disadvantages of belonging to a union, such as the possibility of strikes, serving on picket lines, paying dues, fines and assessments. - Explain the meaning of the phrases “dues checkoff” and “union shop.” - Inform them of any prior experience you’ve had with unions and what facts you know about the particular union that’s trying to organize them. - Tell your employees how their wages and benefits compare with other unionized and nonunionized companies with less desirable packages. - Disclose the names of known gangsters or other undesirable elements who may be or have been active in the union, provided this is accurate information that can be verified by official sources. - Inform them that, insofar as their status with the company is concerned, they are free to join or not to join any organization they choose. - Express the hope that your employees vote against this or any union. [1] https://www.thehrspecialist.com/14099/unions-in-the-spotlight-what-employers-can-and-cant-do https://www.thehrspecialist.com/14099/unions-in-the-spotligh... Special emphasis on the last point. This is not me "arbitrarily" deciding anything. I don't even care that much about this. This is simply the other side of the coin. Companies can do this and therefore they do it. I have no personal feelings or strong opinions regarding unionization. I'm just showing the facts.
FpUser 6y ago
Are Amazon employees really going to even read those leaflets? This is just too rich on Amazon's site. Like they really give a flying fuck about people saving those $500 in dues. C'mon, tell it to your house cat. It might actually believe you.
whydoyoucare 6y ago
I am of the firm belief that Unions are a thing that are extremely good in theory, but rarely work out in practice. They kill innovation, profits and skills and turns a competitive workforce into a mediocre one. :-(
- enraged_camel 6y ago
  Innovation and profits aren’t the only things that matter in life. Unions are the result of the same movement that gave us things like 40-hour workweeks and two day weekends.
  - AdrianB1 6y ago
    This is cargo cult logic.
- wickedsickeune 6y ago
  They kill innovation in worker exploitation :( > turns a competitive workforce into a mediocre one Because the people employed in Amazon warehouses will stop self improving and being competitive, but only if they join a union.
- aidenn0 6y ago
  At a minimum, the credible threat of unionization is necessary to protect worker's rights. Amazon treated employees in a way that made it clear that they did not see the threat as credible. If Amazon gets destroyed by unionization, maybe the next company will treat their employees better.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  I agree. But it turns out that the absence of unions doesn't work out in practice, either...
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- amelius 6y ago
  From the perspective of who are you talking? CEO or blue-collar worker?
simsla 6y ago
I hope enough people vote yes. The way FC workers are treated is not ok. It's the main blemish on a company I otherwise respect. "Other companies treat FC staff like shit too" is not an excuse. Disclaimer: Work for Amazon (corp / tech side). Opinion my own, obviously.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  > "Other companies treat FC staff like shit too" is not an excuse. How is this not an excuse? Most people would switch to Walmart/Target/Bestbuy or any other retailer if the price on Amazon is higher.
  - criddell 6y ago
    I wonder how price sensitive Amazon shoppers actually are. I know I buy from there mostly because of the low friction and wide selection. I rarely check prices.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      I'm assuming the people working at Amazon are capable of figuring that out, and since the prices on Amazon are not higher than the other retailers, they have concluded their customers are price sensitive. Otherwise Amazon is leaving money on the table by not already charging higher prices, which is a bet I would not make.
      - Bedon292 6y ago
        I have many times found things more expensive on Amazon than other sources. Most of that I put down to shipping being factored into their prices, vs added in at the end for online retailers or just being aggregated across the whole inventory of physical retailers. But a big factor is time to me is time. I can get this thing for $2 cheaper at the store, but then it would be a dedicated trip out for something I can have on my doorstep in the morning.
thinkingemote 6y ago
Twitch (owned by Amazon) is also apparently targeting Alabama residents with anti-union ads: https://twitter.com/moreperfectus/status/1364318690271969285 https://twitter.com/moreperfectus/status/1364318690271969285
Animats 6y ago
Better coverage than Vice, in The Guardian.[1] Interestingly, there is now a global union, based in Switzerland, that's organizing multinationals. They're up to 20 million members.[2] They've been able to organize two US gig-worker companies, Manpower and Kelly Services. They have a brochure on Amazon: "Essentially irresponsible".[3] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/23/amazon-bessemer-alabama-union https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/23/amazon-be... [2] https://uniglobalunion.org/about-us/global-agreements https://uniglobalunion.org/about-us/global-agreements [3] https://uniglobalunion.org/sites/default/files/attachments/pdf/amazoncovid_en_pages.pdf https://uniglobalunion.org/sites/default/files/attachments/p...
jeanjogr 6y ago
I have never been able to quite grasp what it means to "unionize" in the US. Here in my country, unions work like political parties (which I understand is not exactly enticing right now): - you are free to join or not - there are elected workers' representatives whether there are unions are not - unions serve to organize workers for action and representatives elections, support candidates, and provide additional services as well In this context, there is no one big vote to unionize or not, and no "union jobs". How does it work in the US?
- random5634 6y ago
  The US is a bit different. 1) Many unions are govt unions - think police, prison guard, teachers. 2) For closed shop states, if a union wins election, EVERYONE has to join the union. 3) A history of corruption in unions in some cases. 4) There is a perception in the US that unions and lazy workers overlap. Teachers unions, prison guard unions, police unions - they need to have some real good examples of the successes unions can bring. Internationally (at least in EU in my experience) there really are those. In the US it's a bit muddied. The latest example I saw, a parent wanted to try and get schools to reopen. Union called them racist - "she was being racist and not considering “the needs of brown/black families who 'predominantly want to stay home' as evidenced by the several months old OUSD survey that was sent out to all district parents." Stuff like this is kind of eye rolling. The union starts calling folks racist for wanting their kids in school? Do the black/brown folks they are speaking for even agree with these claims?
  - pseudalopex 6y ago
    All states are open shop or agency shop. Federal law prohibits closed shop.
  - banannaise 6y ago
    > Do the black/brown folks they are speaking for even agree with these claims? For the most part, yes. Black/brown communities have higher COVID infection and death rates, so sending children to school disproportionately harms Black and brown people, and a lot of them have expressed this exact concern.
AdrianB1 6y ago
Some colleagues asked me when I will start a company 'cause they want to join me. My dream of that company is that if a union is even needed, I have failed and that company needs to close. I understand why some people want unions. I also know about a very long history of unions either completely destroying companies or having a negative influence over them, including the countries in Europe like my own. Long term unions become a parasitic entity that has the main purpose to continue its existence for the profit of the union leaders and nobody else and using all the influence to achieve that goal, even if the host is negatively impacted.
- phabora 6y ago
  Your dream has two outcomes: 1. You get outcompeted by other companies that look out for Number One, namely the bottom line 2. You get surrounded by an entourage of corporate sycophants that nurture your lie about how your company is so benevolent that no worker representation is necessary
dillondoyle 6y ago
There are a couple mentions but no top comments: Amazon has installed a mailbox at their facility, this mail piece specifically says to use it. AND this mail piece says 'BE DONE by 3/1' when workers have until the end of the month to vote (context: amazon must stop anti-union mandatory meetings etc during voting). This could be a legal violation & is a big deal. I think at a minimum breaks the spirit of the NLRB mail-in voting ruling. HN seems to consider big tech = oppressive surveillance. I'll let you draw your own conclusions. This is also the latest in a long list of extreme tactics some aren't mentioned in this article. To name a few: Amazon also fired an activist who was speaking out. It's been reported Amzn has been penalizing pro-union employees with baseless and unfair management penalties/'strikes' and purposeful last minute over-time demands as punishment. Digital surveillance. Management basically stalking associates in break rooms, asking if they are only there to organize and attorneys and consultants drawing graph person relationship research charts to map their employees. A big propaganda push online & a pretty successful press drive - most of these articles Amazon gets many inches of positive talking points. https://www.vox.com/2019/3/22/18277322/amazon-fired-warehouse-worker-staten-island-union https://www.vox.com/2019/3/22/18277322/amazon-fired-warehous... https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/how-amazon-is-fighting-back-against-workers-efforts-to-unionize.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/how-amazon-is-fighting-back-... https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/02/02/amazon-union-warehouse-workers/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/02/02/amazon-...
- A12-B 6y ago
  The core of the issue is that people don't believe a company that big would break the law so easily. In reality it's the opposite: When you're that big breaking the law becomes really easy because you have the strongest legal defence. Amazon won't see a single minute of court time for this.
  - smnrchrds 6y ago
    To add to that, fines can and do bankrupt small businesses. I cannot remember the last time a big company went bankrupt by fines. Breaking the law poses existential threat to small businesses, not large enterprises.
technofiend 6y ago
I'm kinda surprised Amazon hasn't taken the opposite approach and just said you want a union? Fine, here's our opening position.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
hikerclimber 6y ago
i think amazon is a corrupt company. just like most of wall street. I hope stocks go to 0. and same with bonds in the U.S. so the entire economy collapses.
yawaworht1978 6y ago
Imagine if the person who was assigned or in charge to do the printing and distribution of these instruction leaflets was pro union. There is an odd aversion to unions in the US. I find the "do not book that dinner" metaphor fitting. Bezos and Musk will book it for you instead. How do people not see a pattern that some of the richest people out there exploit the workforce the most(urinate in bottle at Amazon, safety and hours at tesla etc) are fiercely opposing unions? You know who has pretty good unions? The police departments, ask them about it.
abstractbarista 6y ago
What happens to the people who didn't want to pay in, if the union does get set up? Will they be forced to have money taken from them to continue working there? I'd probably quit if some organization suddenly started siphoning my paycheck. Sure unionize if you want, and I'll strike with you over issues, but that doesn't require my payment to accomplish. I am very thankful to live in a right to work state where nobody can forcibly steal the fruits of my labor.
- ketzo 6y ago
  Unions don't ask for dues just to grift you. At a minimum, any half-competent union should be able to tell you how they're going to get you more than your dues in value from the union. This could be actual increased pay, benefits, or other value from collective organization. No one is trying to steal anything from you. Unions are for workers. If you think Amazon is in your corner more than a union would be, I would consider reevaluating that idea.\ All that said: almost no unionized workplace that I know of has a situation where you are required to be part of the union to work there, so no, you won't be forced. For example, U.S. federal employees have huge, long-lived unions with a lot of prominence, and only 26% of federal employees actually belong to a union.
  - tor11 6y ago
    > Unions are for workers funny.
    - ketzo 6y ago
      ....why? I understand that there are shitty unions out there. But my statement seems pretty factual for the idea of unions as a whole.
      - tor12 6y ago
        unions are usually used for lobbying and opinion.
  - abstractbarista 6y ago
kristofferR 6y ago
People should really watch the Oscar winning documentary "American Factory", totally eye-opening in regards to the practices of union busting, among many things.
kache_ 6y ago
wagie wagie get back in cagie
stakkur 6y ago
Amazon's tactics eerily resemble early coal mining union busters: disinformation, veiled threats, Pinkerton agents, etc.
proverbialbunny 6y ago
Does anyone have an alternative site they go to to buy household goods than amazon.com? Mostly kitchen supplies. Amazon often sells items lower quality than Walmart. It sucks and it feels like they have a monopoly. I'd rather shop anywhere else. edit: Maybe https://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/ https://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/ ? I haven't bought anything there, but I might try it if there are not better recommendations.
- thebigspacefuck 6y ago
  Target is pretty good. One of my local Kroger has a large household goods section. Both have curbside pickup or delivery and prices are decent.
  - proverbialbunny 6y ago
    Thanks ^_^
stewx 6y ago
How is Amazon allowed to say "A union cannot deliver greater job security or better wages and benefits"? It's presented as a factual statement, but, at best, it's the company's opinion, and at worst it's a blatant lie.
- plandis 6y ago
  What law does that violate?
  - advisedwang 6y ago
    29 USC 158 (a)(1) probably. Maybe (a)(2). 29 USC 162 arguably.
Macha 6y ago
Something I don't understand about US unions I often see mandatory dues being brought up as arguments against unions in the US. I've never heard of that practice here, so I looked and it is in fact illegal here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#Council_of_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#Council_of_Europe based on the freedom of association (which also covers freedom of _not_ associating). There's also no requirement for employers to negotiate or recognise unions. Usually if sufficient members of the company are in a union the employer will negotiate pay terms with them - they don't have a requirement too, though of course the union can strike to bring them to the negotiating table. Some employers might make a single negotiation with the union and use that as the basis for their pay grades or other terms, though again, there's no requirement for them to do so. What I don't understand is why US unions don't embrace that - if they don't adopt the "mandatory membership" part, surely the opposition to their existence has less to argue for. You don't need a big vote, members just join, and if there's enough of them they can bring employers to the negotiating table. Yes, you can get freeloaders, but that seems preferable to having no union for the employees that need it most. I'm in tech, so there's not much call for the unionisation of tech in my country. But that's because it's a seller's market, an individual tech worker often has more leeway to insist on improvements to their pay or conditions than a factory worker and both sides know it. it's why e.g. you get management apologising for 9:30am meetings if a visiting exec is in town and they want to impress but arrive at 9:10am to the factory or mcdonalds and expect an unpleasant meeting with your supervisor. (Also if you were lucky, you knew that you were rosted for 9am the week before) Most people from my school days, and even my father are in jobs like this. If I was too, I would totally be in a union. Part of me wonders if in tech we really should be too to have the infrastructure in place if a time comes when the market for tech work is dramatically different. Certainly given the state of unions and low wage employment conditions in my country, if I hadn't been lucky to have something I was interested in and had aptitude for pay so well, I would join a union if I had to work on it. I know people like to harp on about examples like the US auto industry or UK mining industry where strong insistence of worker's rights was arguably a contributor to the industry in those countries going under, but it's not clear to me that industries like call centers or retail where that didn't happen have had much better outcomes for employees. Better outcomes for the businesses operating them, sure, employees, ehh...
jhanschoo 6y ago
One of the instructions not caught by the article asks that you write your name on the envelope else it won't be counted. Is that really the case? Alongside the new mailbox it looks like a way to track who has voted.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
londons_explore 6y ago
The instructions imply each person should sign the outside of the envelope. The outside of the envelope typically doesn't have any legal privacy protections. That means Amazon can collect a list of people who have voted.
abacadaba 6y ago
I mean I wouldn't really want a union, but I'd prob vote yes after that just because I don't like being told not to.
frongpik 6y ago
Someone needs to write the new version of "Moral Mazes". The original one described a noname chemical corp (DuPont?) full of execs that had sold their souls. Now someone we need something similar for Amazon.
DorothyOns80 6y ago
Just bought seху undeгweaг. Wanna see? Visit thе sitе -> https://xlink.cc/sXE1m https://xlink.cc/sXE1m

Detailed, 6 step instructions on how to open a ballot and mark no? Thanks, amazon. This is almost as scummy as asking the city to change traffic lights so union organizers have a harder time talking to workers in between shifts. https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-says-traffic-lights-were-changed-near-amazon.html https://www.al.com/business/2021/02/jefferson-county-now-say...

deelowe 6y ago
I think an important detail that's needed here is how long the traffic back up issue has been a problem and when amazon requested it be change. If this has been an issue for years and amazon only recently requested the change, that's pretty scummy.
- sodality2 6y ago
  “This action was taken on Dec. 15, 2020 after being notified by Amazon of traffic delays. The action taken is routine for traffic signal operations, in that signal timing plans are adjusted to be as efficient as possible.” Doesn't say how long it was a problem though.
duxup 6y ago
I got instructions from more than one party this past fall on how to fill out a ballot and mail it early and etc.
- sodality2 6y ago
  Did they tell you which way to vote, though? And giving reasoning for why (this actually wouldn't surprise me)?
  - duxup 6y ago
    Yes they told me exactly who I should vote for and why.
    - sodality2 6y ago
      Hm. In my opinion that isn't as bad, but I can't put my finger on why. This is one reason: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26263866
      - duxup 6y ago
        I thought it was weird, but I can't imagine a basis for not allowing that. Even if it was someone's boss... they too get to talk / have an opinion... even if I think it is wrong. I've certainly worked for employers who I thought had some very wrong ideas, I still did my own thing voting wise.
    - kedean 6y ago
      IMO the key difference is that you were getting mail from political parties. I think the correct comparison would be if the US government were sending you mail instructing you on how to vote for the party already in power. There's a big difference between the party pleading its case to you and the government itself endorsing that party. I think Amazon's power over employees makes it more like the latter, although neither is a perfect analogy. If I had gotten mailers last year directly from the United States government instructing me "how to re-elect Donald J. Trump", I would have been livid. Individual within the company should be able to make their case for why they think unionization is bad, but I don't think the company itself gets a say in this.
- rtpg 6y ago
  It wasn't your boss telling you how to do that though. The direct power imbalance is pretty different, I think.
  - SilasX 6y ago
    Then I don’t understand the outrage. What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? The GGP seemed to think that there was something particularly bad about the detailed six page instructions. But the GP correctly pointed out they do the same thing in regular government elections (to milk as many voters as they can).
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      > What’s offensive about instructions on how to fill out a ballot above and beyond the fact of them asking you to vote no? Nothing. The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. If they were trying to help you fill out your ballot in good faith, there wouldn't be a problem.
      - SilasX 6y ago
        No. The OP was complaining about something already assuming they're telling you to vote no, meaning the OP was adding something on top of that. I was asking what that thing-on-top is. So it has to be something more than: >The outrage is about them telling you to vote no. Which, indeed, you correct yourself on in the next sentence, to say that the issue is that it pretends to be neutral ballot instructions, but, if followed, end in you voting no, and are thus misleading (just guessing -- again, no one here seems to be making it easy to understand what they're objecting to). If so, it would have been helpful for the OP to communicate that the first time around. Remember rtpg joined in to clarify, but actually objected to something else, the power imbalance -- and yet s/he seemed to believe s/he was agreeing with the initial comment! Not everyone can read minds about what a speaker thinks is the most salient part, and we don't deserve to be ridiculed for asking. If you want others to be outraged, it helps to clearly communicate what they're supposed to be outraged about -- starting form a clear model.
Dirlewanger 6y ago
Unbelievable. This is petty shit you'd expect from 100+ years ago when companies were breaking strikes by killing people. Might as well rename this country to the Corporate States of America. No level of government has any backbone against the private sector.
- marcinzm 6y ago
  Yes changing the timing of some traffic lights is exactly the same as killing people.
  - damnyou 6y ago
    Well, for its union busting efforts Amazon has been using spies from the literal, actual Pinkerton: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-pinkerton-spies-worker-labor-unions-2020-11%3famp https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/amazon-... Yes, it's the same Pinkerton that did this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_strike edit: Ah, I've been shadow banned. I probably offended the mods when I pointed out how much of a racist Scott Siskind was. Hey dang, you, by virtue of wanting to keep the community on this site over eradicating white supremacism from here — you are a white supremacist.
- w0m 6y ago
  That's a bit too far. Ignore unions; and amazon fixed traffic congestion leaving their complex. If a unionization effort is reliant on an unnecessary traffic jam to form - it's destined to fail.
throwawaysea 6y ago
Why is one group (union activists) allowed to take such action but the other group isn't? I am not sure I see anything "scummy" in this.
- sodality2 6y ago
  They are allowed to. That is why they did. Just as I am allowed to call them scummy for it
  - fastball 6y ago
    You know what they meant. Why is one scummy and the other not?
    - sodality2 6y ago
      Amazon is strong-arming workers into voting no with propaganda posters, unions typically hurt amazon (else why would they fight so hard against it), and typically help the workers. Do you not see the problem here? I don't mean to say unions are always right. I see anti-union sentiment from the very company that would be hurt by it to be very much allowed. But since I believe in worker's rights and can see firsthand how poorly they are treated, I see it as scummy.
      - s1artibartfast 6y ago
        Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart.
        sodality2 6y ago
        >Just to be clear, this is a double standard based on your priors. >Vote No propaganda is bad because unions are good. >Vote Yes propaganda is good because unions are good. Double standard? Not really. Definitely not the peak of critical reasoning, though. But I'm not judging anti-union vs pro-union propaganda by anything but their motives. >If you are not convinced that unions age good in the first place, then it all falls apart. Ah, but I do. Not inherently, and not always. But net positive in my opinion. Sure, if I change my beliefs to contradict, it will not make sense. Just as if I believed unions were bad and net negative, union propaganda would be considered scummy but amazon propaganda wouldn't. I always try to judge critically, and in my personal opinion, pro vs anti has a clear benefit for the worker on one side. This doesn't mean I think the other shouldn't exist. I don't think that means a double standard, since in my eyes they aren't the same. If they were literally the same, say Amazon wanted the Yankees to win and the workers wanted the Red Sox to win, and I insisted on one side over the other, then it would be a double standard (like 1984, they do it = bad, we do the same thing = good).
fireball_blaze 6y ago
Also reference Amazon's "Do it without dues" site: https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/ https://www.doitwithoutdues.com/
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  Wow, just wow. "Don’t buy that dinner, don’t buy those school supplies, don’t buy those gifts because you won’t have that almost $500 you paid in dues." It seems Amazon's main argument for why people shouldn't join a union is that Amazon's wages are so low that they cannot financially afford to. That's almost like saying "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place."
  - _jal 6y ago
    > "You're too poor to fight for your rights. Know your place." Well, yes. The goal of an antiunion campaign is the demoralization/ disempowerment of the workforce. Notice also the recent push for "experimental polities", AKA company towns.
    - CodeMage 6y ago
      St. Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go, I owe my soul to the company store.
    - nexthash 6y ago
      For context about "experimental polities" like the failed Toronto SideWalk labs [1], I've linked an article below [2]. [1] https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-toronto-project/ https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/07/sidewalk-labs-shuts-down-t... [2] https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company-towns-end-up-as-failed-utopias-94270 https://theconversation.com/will-silicon-valleys-new-company...
  - andrepd 6y ago
    "But higher wages can buy many dinners." "Explain how!" "Money can be exchanged for goods and services"
thiagocsf 6y ago
This site has an anti ad-block pop up that stops you from closing the browser window in iOS. Had to close the whole HN app to leave the in-app browser.

maxehmookau 6y ago

Ugh, this is disgusting and so patronising. Edit: Also, why are "union avoidance consultants" a thing? The US needs to fix its culture around unions. That's absolutely wild.

TheCraiggers 6y ago
I don't think that's caused from the culture around unions so much as it's caused by the culture around capitalism. There are plenty of scummy niches that people have found ways of getting paid for. Everything from consultants to show your company how to layoff people to religious leaders and snake oil salesmen and conmen. It's a big spectrum.
falcolas 6y ago
Why pay your employees when you can pay a consultant to show how to keep your employee costs low? /s
- phone8675309 6y ago
  IF your company thinks spending $X on keeping you from unionizing is worth it then the benefit to you is at least ($X+1)/$num_workers to unionize.
  - chasd00 6y ago
    do you have any idea how big the num_workers number is? I'd wager for the average employee the benefit will be neagative, as in paycheck - union dues. The real benefit goes to the union bosses as num_workers * union_dues.
    - bjoli 6y ago
      Now, I am not very up to date on statistics, but unionised workers have traditionally earned about 10% more than non-uniomized ones in the US since at least the 80s. The article mentions 11%, which seems in line with what I know since before. I doubt any union would charge anywhere near that much.

AlexandrB 6y ago

Amazon's tactics in response to unionizing efforts been extremely revealing. Even if unionizing fails, I'm happy that it forced Amazon to show us all the level of contempt they have for their workforce.

minikites 6y ago
Every corporation has contempt for its workforce, it's why labor unions are so necessary.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  Nearly every corporation has naked contempt for its “human resources”, that's why it calls them, and the department responsible for minimizing the cost of exploiting them, “human resources”.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    Indeed. It's a bit sad how us human resources often balk at accepting this fact.
- Someone1234 6y ago
  It varies. Not because some corporations are moral, but because happy workers are a good long-term strategy and many corporations are stuck with rolling short-term-ism. They reward the top tier on a three-ish year cycle, so executives only need to make the numbers go up for three years before exiting with a higher paying job and compensation via stock sales. The US has a massive issue in general with rolling corporate pump & dump. The whole stock market basically encourages it. That's why we see things like customer retention strategies that actually reduce re-subscriptions and hurt the long term reputations remaining popular (because the short term matters more to executives than the long term, even if the company burns down after they leave).
  - willcipriano 6y ago
    "I'll be gone, you'll be gone"[0] [0]https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/IBGYBG https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/IBGYBG

ahelwer 6y ago

This Amazon union vote is one of the few things I see around me in the world where things have a chance of heading in the right direction. Truly hoping it succeeds and creates a nucleation event to stop our march into ever-more-innovative methods of worker exploitation.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
I felt this was about Uber being told they had to treat drivers like employees in California too, and look how that turned out: A dystopian rule that lawmakers can't overturn to enable worker exploitation.
- ahelwer 6y ago
  Well, that's electoral politics for ya. Without organized labor power to stand up to capital, things are close to a one-way ratchet.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  These kinds of takes are always weird to me. Shouldn't it matter, at least a little, that the rule was what a 17-point majority of voters wanted? You don't have to personally agree with every democratic outcome, but it almost sounds like you're saying the results of a vote aren't legitimate if they go the wrong way.
  - aidenn0 6y ago
    This is just an anecdote, but perhaps other people can comment, since the plural of anecdote is data... I personally know several people who voted for the proposition under the impression that it was a pro-worker proposition that would guarantee benefits for drivers. There were 3 other people for whom I explained the context around it (including the fact that it was preempting a flawed bill from the legislature) before they mailed their ballots in and they changed their vote. I also know several people who think that we should eliminate the rules for treating workers as employees in general, and they voted for the bill as well, so there's definitely some support. Its definitely clear from my point of view that a significant fraction of the people who voted for the proposition did so because they misunderstood what they were voting for. OTOH that's probably true about all ballot measures ever, and probably most legislation as well.

duxup 6y ago

Call me crazy but I think the employer should get to make their case too.

toomuchtodo 6y ago
"As a trillion dollar company we can't afford better working conditions and pay for you"? The only reason Amazon raised their fulfillment pay was because Bernie Sanders shamed them into it [1]. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+bernie+sanders+pay https://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+bernie+sanders+pay
- duxup 6y ago
  I don't expect people to agree with their case, but they should get to make it.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    By making any case other than robust worker rights and fair compensation, they have demonstrated their culture and priorities as a corporation. But, by all means, I agree that one shouldn't stop their enemy when they're pointing a gun at their feet (edit: to clarify, this implies Amazon is making a strategic failure by fighting unionization efforts, at it reflects poorly on them).
    - duxup 6y ago
      You're hyperbole strikes me as ... kinda out there. Not sure anyone has guns pointed at anyone in this case.
      - toomuchtodo 6y ago
        Your comments strike me as unaware or complacent. https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/04/29/Leaving-Amazon https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/04/29/Leaving-A... https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/05/06/Answers https://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/202x/2020/05/06/Answers https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/05/amazon-workers-protest-unsafe-grueling-conditions-warehouse https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/feb/05/amazon-wo... https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/youre-just-disposable-new-accounts-from-former-amazon-employees-raise-questions-about-working-conditions/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/youre-just-dispos... https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/11/amazon-warehouse-reports-show-worker-injuries/602530/ https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/11/amazo... https://nypost.com/2019/07/13/inside-the-hellish-workday-of-an-amazon-warehouse-employee/ https://nypost.com/2019/07/13/inside-the-hellish-workday-of-... https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/16/20696154/amazon-prime-day-2019-strike-warehouse-workers-inhumane-conditions-the-rate-productivity https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/16/20696154/amazon-prime-day...

Zealotux 6y ago

From a non-US point of view, this whole anti-union strategy from Amazon is somehow hilarious to witness on top of being sad. This kind of propaganda feels like its coming from another age, or dimension.

Grimm1 6y ago
Right out of the 1900's in fact, gilded age part 2: technologic boogaloo.
- x2w8TGm8BSTd853 6y ago
  Are the Pinkertons fair game just like they are in Red Dead Redemption 2? Oh, my: but I don’t have a horse. Hope this won’t prevent me from taking part.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Someone1234 6y ago
The depressing part is that this is actually an improvement over the violence and intimidation tactics of America's past. The US has never been a particularly union supportive country. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_union_busting_in_th...
- pydry 6y ago
  There's still time to return to the good old days when the boss called in a private air force to drop poison gas and bombs on striking workers.
  - ModernMech 6y ago
    Yes, this is a good reminder that the first areal attack on US soil was not Pearl Harbor, but was against striking workers in 1921 at the Battle of Blair Mountain. "By August 29 battle was fully joined. Chafin's men, though outnumbered, had the advantage of higher positions and better weaponry. Private planes were hired to drop homemade bombs on the miners. A combination of poison gas and explosive bombs left over from World War I were dropped in several locations near the towns of Jeffery, Sharples and Blair." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain Someone else in the thread mentioned a revived push for "company towns", which is exactly what these workers were fighting against. Being fired from their company meant losing their job and their house, since it was owned by the company. Honestly, it's not much different from being fired in 2021 and losing your job and your health insurance.

dfxm12 6y ago

I can't believe some of these actions being taken by Amazon don't violate the NLRA. Maybe they've done the math and have concluded that any protentional penalties will cost less than allowing a fair shake at a union or maybe they think the recently packed courts will tend to favor corporate interests over workers' rights.

lucasmullens 6y ago

How does this not backfire? At Google I'm just sitting on the sidelines with the whole union thing, but if they sent me something like this I'd join and support the union immediately.

ahelwer 6y ago
This is a pretty interesting question, and I think prods at other questions about the actual form that tech worker unions will take - especially in big companies like Google. Will they be actual organized units capable of orchestrating coordinated action to withhold labor for improvement of material conditions? Or will they just be a sort of caucus that issue statements about political issues at work and occasionally organize an afternoon walkout? If the latter, this isn't the sort of thing that will bother management very much. Certainly not at the existential level of "some of the stock dividend/buyback money will have to be redirected from shareholders to workers, my GOD"
- whimsicalism 6y ago
  I think employee walkouts will bother management quite a bit. And compensation/benefit issues are political ones.
- grumple 6y ago
  We might not notice the tech workers walking out at google. It's not like they provide support. At AWS - we'd definitely notice, because their support is really good. > Will they be actual organized units capable of orchestrating coordinated action to withhold labor for improvement of material conditions? Developers have the money to withstand very long strikes if needed. I think there's a lot of power in that.
skeeter2020 6y ago
That doesn't make any sense. You're saying you have made some sort of value judgement, presumably based on logic and information, but if someone sends you a piece of propaganda you'd totally change your position? You don' t play poker, do you?

stevespang 6y ago

You can bet there are pinhole cameras installed near that box, Bezos has a feed going straight into his office . . .

RicoElectrico 6y ago

News about Amazon's treatment of workers invariably makes me angry, and I'm not even from USA. Just do something about it. Take the nuclear option.

Grimm1 6y ago

Personally I like the idea of worker representation on the board of directors, with enough representation that they don't just get steamrolled by other board members as a potentially viable solution to worker concerns. I think people should be treated pretty well in a job setting, my thought is that well treated employees while costing more actually wind up producing for the business well in excess of the expense and much more than when treated like parts as well as it imo just being the ethical thing to do. I've only heard negative things from friends who have worked in unions or with unionized employees and I understand things vary greatly union to union so I'm skeptical of how overall beneficial they are to normal workers, high performing workers and the business which ultimately they work for. They largely seem like ways for certain outspoken individuals to consolidate power and become another vehicle for corruption and stagnation, much like already broken corporate structure. All of that said this may be the only avenue possible at the moment as nothing in the US screams major labor reforms to me and no larger business seems willing to try to experiment with other solutions.

phabora 6y ago
High-performers (read: well-payed workers) like to complain about the nefarious corrupting influence of unions but seldom consider the case that the high-performers (read: upper-middle class) might have a vested interest in the corrupt status quo where the majority of workers facilitate their high-performing (read: privileged) lifestyles.
- eeZah7Ux 6y ago
  You are confusing skill with access to capital.
- Grimm1 6y ago
  I mean all the anecdotes I have come from electricians and county paid groundskeepers and who also happen to be my close friends so I'd have to say your assertion if not false in totality is false in this case for certain. Edit: Oh and a general contractor or two.
  - 6y ago

jonathantf2 6y ago

Interesting that the site they're linking in that booklet is hosted on Squarespace and not AWS.

TheMagicHorsey 6y ago

It's amazing how little HN readers understand about unions. A company is an organization that has some positive and some negative aspects. And believe it or not, a union is also an organization with some negative and positive aspects. The difference is, once you have a union in an organization its very hard to dislodge it no matter how dysfunctional it gets. I would suggest HN readers read about what UAW did in the auto industry, particularly the way the auto union functioned at the Toyota NUMA plant in California. Then they should read about the corruption at the Teamsters (I'm sure you have heard about the collusion between union bosses like Hoffa and the Mafia). The high profile corruption is just the tip of the iceberg. Even your local teachers union has a tremendous amount of nepotism and corruption ... its not at all meritocratic. And the worst part about a union is that it turns the workplace from a zone where we are evaluated based on our output into a zone where politics dominates when it comes time for compensation and promotion discussions. I will never again work in a unionized workplace ... and thanks to getting an education and learning how to program I will thankfully not have to do it ever again.

rtkwe 6y ago
If we're going to go back in time to talk about Hoffa era unions why stop there, companies used to prefer gunning down their striking/organizing employees with Pinkerton agents rather than give benefits of any kind. With a union there's some democratic influence. You're only option for changing the company is to leave if you're anywhere below VP level.
sodality2 6y ago
>I would suggest HN readers read about what UAW did in the auto industry, particularly the way the auto union functioned at the Toyota NUMA plant in California. Link some, first results I get for UAW + auto industry are propagandized anti-union sites and Toyota's own press release about how they're proud to give more money to the team.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
UncleMeat 6y ago
> The difference is, once you have a union in an organization its very hard to dislodge it no matter how dysfunctional it gets. In comparison to a business? With a union I have some voting power. With a business I have zero power.

durnygbur 6y ago

Is this for real? They really sent post with instructions on who should one vote for?

Spivak 6y ago
Have you never received a voting guide from the local chapter of your political party?
- durnygbur 6y ago
  no, never

balabaster 6y ago

Full disclosure: I've always been anti-union for my own personal approach to life. I do see the value in unions, I've just always, to this point, been a go-it-alone-and-fight-my-own-battles kind of person. I don't want to be beholden to a union or their rules any more than I want to be beholden to an employer beyond my contractual obligations for which I'm paid. That said, people should take note of what happened when Walmart used these tactics. Employees then went on to suffer such things as zero hour contracts, contracts where time was just shy of the legal requirement to give them benefits, pay was no more than the minimum required in any given state/province and people became slaves to their jobs because they couldn't afford the time off to find other jobs because then they wouldn't be able to make ends meet or there were no other jobs so Walmart had zero incentive to pay any more than absolutely required to by law. etc. etc. etc. because humanity is only afforded if legally required [which I personally find disgusting]. These are tactics to prevent a coalition of employees from having their rights heard and maintained... even with this coalition someone is fighting to maintain and win your rights(!!!!!) There's something very wrong with anyone having to fight for their rights to be given, but that's another discussion. In a commercial environment that allow employers to behave this way, where the only advantage to winning your rights is in a coalition of the workforce holding employers to account, unions absolutely must not only be allowed but must also be protected. Its okay if you're bullheaded enough or within your means enough to walk away if your rights aren't given fair consideration and honoured, but if you're in a position where you're a prisoner to your job, i.e. can't afford to take time off to find another job/other income, or there are no other jobs in your area and you don't have the means to leave etc. you don't have any bargaining chip. No employer should ever have the privilege of keeping you prisoner, nor preventing you from having a means to bargain for your very right to fair treatment. Amazon needs to be severely reprimanded for this and taught a lesson about what it means to honour employees' rights.

tyingq 6y ago
You appear to perhaps be from the UK (saw "honour"). Employees in the UK have quite a lot more protection by default than they do in the US. I do respect your go-it-alone-and-fight-my-own-battles position, but consider that you might feel differently if you were in a US "right to work" state.

wooptoo 6y ago

Here we can see the vicious beast hunting its prey. It's getting desperate now.

williesleg 6y ago

Bunch of commies

lorax_108 6y ago

unions FTW!

dominotw 6y ago

wouldnt it be better to fix 'trail period' laws so thats possible

JCM9 6y ago

I have mixed feelings about unions. While there’s no question that unions played an important role in labor rights during the 20th century, in the 21st century unions now seems to be more a part of the problem rather than a part of the solution.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

whoisjuan 6y ago

This looks bad but companies with unions do this a lot. I remember seeing welcome packages for Delta Airlines employees where they tell them to not join the union and explaining why on their perspective is bad to do so. I'm not saying this is correct, but unions are rarely aligned with companies, so there is always going to be a perpetual fight between unions and companies that have them. You can't really expect Amazon to embrace unionization. They are in their right to try to disincentivize unionization if they believe it could be damaging for their business. Again. I'm not saying this is correct, but I guess that's the whole point of unionizing. If it were an easy fight, it wouldn't make sense to unionize. For the sake of transparency, I would disclose that I'm in principle anti-union but I understand why they exist and how can they be helpful, especially to employees who work low wage jobs and who could be vulnerable to abusive employment practices.

wccrawford 6y ago
I've yet to work for a big non-union company that didn't have some anti-union literature or speech once in a while. It didn't even matter if unionizing was in the employees best interest or not. The company knew it was not in their best interest, and so they spoke out. I'm not at all surprised that Amazon is doing the same.
A12-B 6y ago
They are quite literally not within their right to stop unionisation, as that is illegal. Also it looks bad because it is bad. btw, the line between 'disincentivising' and 'forcing' is decided arbitrarily by you. If they send text messages, block traffic lights, and screw with people's mailboxes, i think amazon crosses the line.
- whoisjuan 6y ago
  Definitely not illegal. You think Amazon, one of the largest companies in the world, will engage in any anti-union campaign without consulting their lawyers on what's right and what's not? It's ok if this is doesn't sit well on you. As I said in the parent comment, if unions were easy they wouldn't make sense. Things companies that have unions or are dealing with unionization efforts can do [1]: - Describe the good features of working for your company, such as existing benefits, job security and steady work. - Remind them that signing union authorization cards doesn’t mean they must vote for the union. - Inform them of the disadvantages of belonging to a union, such as the possibility of strikes, serving on picket lines, paying dues, fines and assessments. - Explain the meaning of the phrases “dues checkoff” and “union shop.” - Inform them of any prior experience you’ve had with unions and what facts you know about the particular union that’s trying to organize them. - Tell your employees how their wages and benefits compare with other unionized and nonunionized companies with less desirable packages. - Disclose the names of known gangsters or other undesirable elements who may be or have been active in the union, provided this is accurate information that can be verified by official sources. - Inform them that, insofar as their status with the company is concerned, they are free to join or not to join any organization they choose. - Express the hope that your employees vote against this or any union. [1] https://www.thehrspecialist.com/14099/unions-in-the-spotlight-what-employers-can-and-cant-do https://www.thehrspecialist.com/14099/unions-in-the-spotligh... Special emphasis on the last point. This is not me "arbitrarily" deciding anything. I don't even care that much about this. This is simply the other side of the coin. Companies can do this and therefore they do it. I have no personal feelings or strong opinions regarding unionization. I'm just showing the facts.

FpUser 6y ago

Are Amazon employees really going to even read those leaflets? This is just too rich on Amazon's site. Like they really give a flying fuck about people saving those $500 in dues. C'mon, tell it to your house cat. It might actually believe you.

whydoyoucare 6y ago

I am of the firm belief that Unions are a thing that are extremely good in theory, but rarely work out in practice. They kill innovation, profits and skills and turns a competitive workforce into a mediocre one. :-(

enraged_camel 6y ago
Innovation and profits aren’t the only things that matter in life. Unions are the result of the same movement that gave us things like 40-hour workweeks and two day weekends.
- AdrianB1 6y ago
  This is cargo cult logic.
wickedsickeune 6y ago
They kill innovation in worker exploitation :( > turns a competitive workforce into a mediocre one Because the people employed in Amazon warehouses will stop self improving and being competitive, but only if they join a union.
aidenn0 6y ago
At a minimum, the credible threat of unionization is necessary to protect worker's rights. Amazon treated employees in a way that made it clear that they did not see the threat as credible. If Amazon gets destroyed by unionization, maybe the next company will treat their employees better.
AnimalMuppet 6y ago
I agree. But it turns out that the absence of unions doesn't work out in practice, either...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
amelius 6y ago
From the perspective of who are you talking? CEO or blue-collar worker?

simsla 6y ago

I hope enough people vote yes. The way FC workers are treated is not ok. It's the main blemish on a company I otherwise respect. "Other companies treat FC staff like shit too" is not an excuse. Disclaimer: Work for Amazon (corp / tech side). Opinion my own, obviously.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
lotsofpulp 6y ago
> "Other companies treat FC staff like shit too" is not an excuse. How is this not an excuse? Most people would switch to Walmart/Target/Bestbuy or any other retailer if the price on Amazon is higher.
- criddell 6y ago
  I wonder how price sensitive Amazon shoppers actually are. I know I buy from there mostly because of the low friction and wide selection. I rarely check prices.
  - lotsofpulp 6y ago
    I'm assuming the people working at Amazon are capable of figuring that out, and since the prices on Amazon are not higher than the other retailers, they have concluded their customers are price sensitive. Otherwise Amazon is leaving money on the table by not already charging higher prices, which is a bet I would not make.
    - Bedon292 6y ago
      I have many times found things more expensive on Amazon than other sources. Most of that I put down to shipping being factored into their prices, vs added in at the end for online retailers or just being aggregated across the whole inventory of physical retailers. But a big factor is time to me is time. I can get this thing for $2 cheaper at the store, but then it would be a dedicated trip out for something I can have on my doorstep in the morning.

thinkingemote 6y ago

Twitch (owned by Amazon) is also apparently targeting Alabama residents with anti-union ads: https://twitter.com/moreperfectus/status/1364318690271969285 https://twitter.com/moreperfectus/status/1364318690271969285

Animats 6y ago

Better coverage than Vice, in The Guardian.[1] Interestingly, there is now a global union, based in Switzerland, that's organizing multinationals. They're up to 20 million members.[2] They've been able to organize two US gig-worker companies, Manpower and Kelly Services. They have a brochure on Amazon: "Essentially irresponsible".[3] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/23/amazon-bessemer-alabama-union https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/23/amazon-be... [2] https://uniglobalunion.org/about-us/global-agreements https://uniglobalunion.org/about-us/global-agreements [3] https://uniglobalunion.org/sites/default/files/attachments/pdf/amazoncovid_en_pages.pdf https://uniglobalunion.org/sites/default/files/attachments/p...

jeanjogr 6y ago

I have never been able to quite grasp what it means to "unionize" in the US. Here in my country, unions work like political parties (which I understand is not exactly enticing right now): - you are free to join or not - there are elected workers' representatives whether there are unions are not - unions serve to organize workers for action and representatives elections, support candidates, and provide additional services as well In this context, there is no one big vote to unionize or not, and no "union jobs". How does it work in the US?

random5634 6y ago
The US is a bit different. 1) Many unions are govt unions - think police, prison guard, teachers. 2) For closed shop states, if a union wins election, EVERYONE has to join the union. 3) A history of corruption in unions in some cases. 4) There is a perception in the US that unions and lazy workers overlap. Teachers unions, prison guard unions, police unions - they need to have some real good examples of the successes unions can bring. Internationally (at least in EU in my experience) there really are those. In the US it's a bit muddied. The latest example I saw, a parent wanted to try and get schools to reopen. Union called them racist - "she was being racist and not considering “the needs of brown/black families who 'predominantly want to stay home' as evidenced by the several months old OUSD survey that was sent out to all district parents." Stuff like this is kind of eye rolling. The union starts calling folks racist for wanting their kids in school? Do the black/brown folks they are speaking for even agree with these claims?
- pseudalopex 6y ago
  All states are open shop or agency shop. Federal law prohibits closed shop.
- banannaise 6y ago
  > Do the black/brown folks they are speaking for even agree with these claims? For the most part, yes. Black/brown communities have higher COVID infection and death rates, so sending children to school disproportionately harms Black and brown people, and a lot of them have expressed this exact concern.

AdrianB1 6y ago

Some colleagues asked me when I will start a company 'cause they want to join me. My dream of that company is that if a union is even needed, I have failed and that company needs to close. I understand why some people want unions. I also know about a very long history of unions either completely destroying companies or having a negative influence over them, including the countries in Europe like my own. Long term unions become a parasitic entity that has the main purpose to continue its existence for the profit of the union leaders and nobody else and using all the influence to achieve that goal, even if the host is negatively impacted.

phabora 6y ago
Your dream has two outcomes: 1. You get outcompeted by other companies that look out for Number One, namely the bottom line 2. You get surrounded by an entourage of corporate sycophants that nurture your lie about how your company is so benevolent that no worker representation is necessary

dillondoyle 6y ago

There are a couple mentions but no top comments: Amazon has installed a mailbox at their facility, this mail piece specifically says to use it. AND this mail piece says 'BE DONE by 3/1' when workers have until the end of the month to vote (context: amazon must stop anti-union mandatory meetings etc during voting). This could be a legal violation & is a big deal. I think at a minimum breaks the spirit of the NLRB mail-in voting ruling. HN seems to consider big tech = oppressive surveillance. I'll let you draw your own conclusions. This is also the latest in a long list of extreme tactics some aren't mentioned in this article. To name a few: Amazon also fired an activist who was speaking out. It's been reported Amzn has been penalizing pro-union employees with baseless and unfair management penalties/'strikes' and purposeful last minute over-time demands as punishment. Digital surveillance. Management basically stalking associates in break rooms, asking if they are only there to organize and attorneys and consultants drawing graph person relationship research charts to map their employees. A big propaganda push online & a pretty successful press drive - most of these articles Amazon gets many inches of positive talking points. https://www.vox.com/2019/3/22/18277322/amazon-fired-warehouse-worker-staten-island-union https://www.vox.com/2019/3/22/18277322/amazon-fired-warehous... https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/how-amazon-is-fighting-back-against-workers-efforts-to-unionize.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/22/how-amazon-is-fighting-back-... https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/02/02/amazon-union-warehouse-workers/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/02/02/amazon-...

A12-B 6y ago
The core of the issue is that people don't believe a company that big would break the law so easily. In reality it's the opposite: When you're that big breaking the law becomes really easy because you have the strongest legal defence. Amazon won't see a single minute of court time for this.
- smnrchrds 6y ago
  To add to that, fines can and do bankrupt small businesses. I cannot remember the last time a big company went bankrupt by fines. Breaking the law poses existential threat to small businesses, not large enterprises.

technofiend 6y ago

I'm kinda surprised Amazon hasn't taken the opposite approach and just said you want a union? Fine, here's our opening position.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

hikerclimber 6y ago

i think amazon is a corrupt company. just like most of wall street. I hope stocks go to 0. and same with bonds in the U.S. so the entire economy collapses.

yawaworht1978 6y ago

Imagine if the person who was assigned or in charge to do the printing and distribution of these instruction leaflets was pro union. There is an odd aversion to unions in the US. I find the "do not book that dinner" metaphor fitting. Bezos and Musk will book it for you instead. How do people not see a pattern that some of the richest people out there exploit the workforce the most(urinate in bottle at Amazon, safety and hours at tesla etc) are fiercely opposing unions? You know who has pretty good unions? The police departments, ask them about it.

abstractbarista 6y ago

What happens to the people who didn't want to pay in, if the union does get set up? Will they be forced to have money taken from them to continue working there? I'd probably quit if some organization suddenly started siphoning my paycheck. Sure unionize if you want, and I'll strike with you over issues, but that doesn't require my payment to accomplish. I am very thankful to live in a right to work state where nobody can forcibly steal the fruits of my labor.

ketzo 6y ago
Unions don't ask for dues just to grift you. At a minimum, any half-competent union should be able to tell you how they're going to get you more than your dues in value from the union. This could be actual increased pay, benefits, or other value from collective organization. No one is trying to steal anything from you. Unions are for workers. If you think Amazon is in your corner more than a union would be, I would consider reevaluating that idea.\ All that said: almost no unionized workplace that I know of has a situation where you are required to be part of the union to work there, so no, you won't be forced. For example, U.S. federal employees have huge, long-lived unions with a lot of prominence, and only 26% of federal employees actually belong to a union.
- tor11 6y ago
  > Unions are for workers funny.
  - ketzo 6y ago
    ....why? I understand that there are shitty unions out there. But my statement seems pretty factual for the idea of unions as a whole.
    - tor12 6y ago
      unions are usually used for lobbying and opinion.
- abstractbarista 6y ago

kristofferR 6y ago

People should really watch the Oscar winning documentary "American Factory", totally eye-opening in regards to the practices of union busting, among many things.

kache_ 6y ago

wagie wagie get back in cagie

stakkur 6y ago

Amazon's tactics eerily resemble early coal mining union busters: disinformation, veiled threats, Pinkerton agents, etc.

proverbialbunny 6y ago

Does anyone have an alternative site they go to to buy household goods than amazon.com? Mostly kitchen supplies. Amazon often sells items lower quality than Walmart. It sucks and it feels like they have a monopoly. I'd rather shop anywhere else. edit: Maybe https://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/ https://www.bedbathandbeyond.com/ ? I haven't bought anything there, but I might try it if there are not better recommendations.

thebigspacefuck 6y ago
Target is pretty good. One of my local Kroger has a large household goods section. Both have curbside pickup or delivery and prices are decent.
- proverbialbunny 6y ago
  Thanks ^_^

stewx 6y ago

How is Amazon allowed to say "A union cannot deliver greater job security or better wages and benefits"? It's presented as a factual statement, but, at best, it's the company's opinion, and at worst it's a blatant lie.

plandis 6y ago
What law does that violate?
- advisedwang 6y ago
  29 USC 158 (a)(1) probably. Maybe (a)(2). 29 USC 162 arguably.

Macha 6y ago

Something I don't understand about US unions I often see mandatory dues being brought up as arguments against unions in the US. I've never heard of that practice here, so I looked and it is in fact illegal here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#Council_of_Europe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop#Council_of_Europe based on the freedom of association (which also covers freedom of _not_ associating). There's also no requirement for employers to negotiate or recognise unions. Usually if sufficient members of the company are in a union the employer will negotiate pay terms with them - they don't have a requirement too, though of course the union can strike to bring them to the negotiating table. Some employers might make a single negotiation with the union and use that as the basis for their pay grades or other terms, though again, there's no requirement for them to do so. What I don't understand is why US unions don't embrace that - if they don't adopt the "mandatory membership" part, surely the opposition to their existence has less to argue for. You don't need a big vote, members just join, and if there's enough of them they can bring employers to the negotiating table. Yes, you can get freeloaders, but that seems preferable to having no union for the employees that need it most. I'm in tech, so there's not much call for the unionisation of tech in my country. But that's because it's a seller's market, an individual tech worker often has more leeway to insist on improvements to their pay or conditions than a factory worker and both sides know it. it's why e.g. you get management apologising for 9:30am meetings if a visiting exec is in town and they want to impress but arrive at 9:10am to the factory or mcdonalds and expect an unpleasant meeting with your supervisor. (Also if you were lucky, you knew that you were rosted for 9am the week before) Most people from my school days, and even my father are in jobs like this. If I was too, I would totally be in a union. Part of me wonders if in tech we really should be too to have the infrastructure in place if a time comes when the market for tech work is dramatically different. Certainly given the state of unions and low wage employment conditions in my country, if I hadn't been lucky to have something I was interested in and had aptitude for pay so well, I would join a union if I had to work on it. I know people like to harp on about examples like the US auto industry or UK mining industry where strong insistence of worker's rights was arguably a contributor to the industry in those countries going under, but it's not clear to me that industries like call centers or retail where that didn't happen have had much better outcomes for employees. Better outcomes for the businesses operating them, sure, employees, ehh...

jhanschoo 6y ago

One of the instructions not caught by the article asks that you write your name on the envelope else it won't be counted. Is that really the case? Alongside the new mailbox it looks like a way to track who has voted.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

londons_explore 6y ago

The instructions imply each person should sign the outside of the envelope. The outside of the envelope typically doesn't have any legal privacy protections. That means Amazon can collect a list of people who have voted.

abacadaba 6y ago

I mean I wouldn't really want a union, but I'd prob vote yes after that just because I don't like being told not to.

frongpik 6y ago

Someone needs to write the new version of "Moral Mazes". The original one described a noname chemical corp (DuPont?) full of execs that had sold their souls. Now someone we need something similar for Amazon.

DorothyOns80 6y ago

Just bought seху undeгweaг. Wanna see? Visit thе sitе -> https://xlink.cc/sXE1m https://xlink.cc/sXE1m